Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was liberal.

Last in Parliament October 2000, as NDP MP for Bras D'Or (Nova Scotia)

Lost her last election, in 2000, with 20% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Acoa February 23rd, 2000

Mr. Speaker, last week I questioned the HRDC minister about Scotia Rainbow and the secretary of state for ACOA answered and made allegations that I was not in tune with my constituents.

CBC reports today indicate that Scotia Rainbow has received over $20 million from various government agencies. Further information indicates that the government is considering further funding to Scotia Rainbow.

Why would the secretary of state for ACOA consider further funding to Scotia Rainbow when judgment after judgment is being filed? Does the minister think this is in tune with Canadians and Cape Bretoners?

Westray Mine February 18th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to stand here today as a coal miner's daughter and as a coal miner's granddaughter to speak to this private member's motion. It is a subject that is very close to my heart. My colleagues in the New Democratic Party and I support the motion in principle.

The hon. member for Halifax has a bill on the order paper, Bill C-259. Its intent and purpose are the same as those of the motion before us today. However it is more legal in nature and takes the intent of this motion one step further to legislate changes. We in the NDP have long been involved in the process and in lobbying for that step.

We would like to see the criminal code amended to ensure that corporate executives and directors are held properly accountable for workplace safety. We in the NDP caucus have been actively involved with the United Steelworkers of America in its lobbying for accountability in workplace health and safety issues. The impetus for the work we have been doing with the steelworkers union was the tragedy at the Westray coal mine in 1992 that killed 26 miners.

The tragedy at Westray was caused by a spark from a continuous mining machine that ignited methane gas, which then caused a coal dust explosion. Following this tragedy we in the NDP, our sisters and brothers in the United Steelworkers of America and the families of the miners killed in that explosion have worked to make the law clear and prevent deaths and injuries. We have to send a message to decision makers that they will be held accountable for their decisions.

I made very clear when I stood before the House to address this motion before, and I will make it perfectly clear again, that we have reached a stage of evolution in society. We will no longer allow people to use the excuse that we were just following orders as a defence for knowingly and willingly causing harm of any kind to others. We as a parliament must take our responsibility to ensure that we live up to the most basic foundation of law and order that people are responsible for their own actions.

After the disaster at Westray a public inquiry was established through the efforts of United Steelworkers of America. The inquiry was given a simple mandate to probe whether or not the explosion was preventable. After 76 days of testimony over a 14 month period the Westray inquiry, headed by Mr. Justice Richard of the Nova Scotia supreme court, released its report.

The report cannot be called anything less than a condemnation of the way in which Westray executives operated the mine prior to the explosion. Mr. Richard was very clear in his report that the actions and attitudes of the management at Westray sent the message that worker safety was not a priority. The miners at Westray, including those who were killed in the explosion in 1992, were expected to produce coal at the expense of worker safety.

This motion is in essence to adopt recommendation No. 73 of the Westray report. I would like to take the opportunity to read the recommendation to the House:

The Government of Canada, through the Department of Justice, should institute a study of the accountability of corporate executives and directors for the wrongful or negligent acts of the corporations and should introduce in the Parliament of Canada such amendments to legislation as are necessary to ensure that corporate executives and directors are held accountable for workplace safety.

The intent of Mr. Richard and the commission is clear. As federal parliamentarians we must take the initiative and introduce changes to the criminal code to ensure corporate accountability in the workplace.

The motion allows us to try to rise above the daily hullabaloo of partisan politics of late. If the motion is passed or adopted by the House, it would be the first step on the road to ensuring that those firms, mining or other, which run their businesses in a responsible way are rewarded. Their reward would come from the punishment of those firms that run their businesses in unsafe ways in their shameful attempt to cut prices. Those businesses that put their workers in danger would not be allowed to operate.

We in Cape Breton know only too well about these kinds of unscrupulous businesses. We do not have to look much further than at the coal industry to provide what should be enough examples to give all my hon. colleagues in the House enough reason to adopt the motion and then go the next step and change the criminal code.

Let me be perfectly clear. This is not about bashing business but about legislating responsible business practice. Responsible business practice means that employers, especially those who run businesses that involve elements of physical or mental risk to their employees, must be accountable if things go wrong. That is precisely what Justice Richard, the families of the miners who died at Westray, the steelworkers and we in the NDP caucus have been trying to do: legislate a framework for responsible business practices as it relates to health and safety of workers.

We as members of parliament must take the lead on this issue, which is why I commend my hon. colleague from Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough on his efforts to have this important motion brought before the House. If we could then see our way to legislating the recommendation of Justice Richard's report, we could help prevent disasters like the one we saw at Westray from ever happening again. It would also not just be in cases of such catastrophic events. This type of legislation would help in creating safer and healthier working environments on a daily basis.

In Westray's case, only two of the executives of the corporation ever appeared before the inquiry. The other executives did not want to give evidence of their crime and resisted all attempts to get them to appear as witnesses. Criminal proceedings against some of the executives had to be dropped because the lawyers concluded that there was no reasonable chance that a conviction could result.

It was not that the lawyers found nothing criminal about their activities. No, the truth was that the evidence was there but the laws were not. There were no laws to prevent the deaths and injuries of the miners at Westray. There were no laws to make the people who caused those deaths accountable to their families.

May I say on a personal note that I am one of those family members who have lost a relative in the mines. It is a sad state of affairs when we have our family members killed in industrial accidents, but may I say that what is more tragic in these deaths at Westray, and as was with my uncle's, is that he was sealed as some of the men at Westray were and will forever remain under the Atlantic Ocean. We have the opportunity to change all of that for miners' families, and today can be the beginning of that process.

I would like to once again return to recommendation 73 of the Westray report. Mr. Justice Richard was very clear in his intent when he wrote:

—in the Parliament of Canada such amendments to legislation as are necessary to ensure that corporate executives and directors are held accountable for workplace safety.

Recent events have shown that even in this House of Commons, where we sit to represent our constituents, it is difficult to achieve accountability and responsibility for one's actions. If it is difficult here, we cannot just expect it from private companies. We must use this motion as the first step to legislating corporate responsibility so that we can prevent further deaths and injuries so tragically revealed by the Westray disaster, and we must do it now.

Human Resources Development February 18th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. I have documents from the minister's own department stating that $2 million was received from the transitional jobs fund for this company. Call after call to my office in Glace Bay tell stories of recent layoffs at Scotia Rainbow, bounced cheques, and public records indicating legal action against Scotia Rainbow.

It appears the only cheques that have not bounced from this company are the cheques contributing to the Liberal Party.

I am asking the minister, is that job creation?

Human Resources Development February 18th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of HRDC. My question is not about job creation, it is about the integrity of the government and the minister.

Yesterday the minister could not explain how a $750,000 grant became a $2 million cheque to a Liberal supporter. Today her officials acknowledge a million dollar top-up.

My question is simple. Who approved the top-up?

Human Resources Development February 17th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, the minister knows the NDP are not against good job creation initiatives, but this is about the integrity of the government and the minister.

Documents clearly show Scotia Rainbow received $2 million for job creation, but the company's financial statement shows that it only spent 7% of that money on salaries.

Is this the minister's definition of job creation or a way to funnel money to Liberal supporters?

Human Resources Development February 17th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, in September 1998 Scotia Rainbow, a company owned by Serge Lafrenière, an influential Liberal supporter, received a TJF grant of $750,000.

Through access to information we have learned two conflicting versions of the Scotia Rainbow story. One is that it received $1 million from TJF. The other is that it received $2 million from TJF.

Can the minister explain how a $750,000 grant became a $2 million cheque to a big Liberal supporter?

Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act February 16th, 2000

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her comments with respect to what is happening in Cape Breton. I hear the members on the government side talk about the real issues, about what we are talking about and that this has nothing to do with the human resources package. As my colleague has mentioned, what we are talking about is that the government has funded this corporation and clearly and obviously has run this corporation into the ground and has now decided to walk away.

What we expect from the government is a fair settlement for the men, the families and the communities of Cape Breton Island. I hear the government members saying would it not be better to allow the communities to decide their fate. Cape Bretoners have been wanting that opportunity for 30 years, but they have never had that opportunity. It has always been left in the hands of the friends of the government to decide for Cape Bretoners what is best for them. That is what has happened to this crown corporation.

Does my colleague agree with the New Democratic Party that this is not about the government making the decision to arbitrarily get out of the industry? It is the government and it can make that decision. This is about ensuring that Cape Breton miners, their families and communities are given a fair settlement before the government walks away and sets this corporation up to sell it probably to another Liberal friend.

Cape Breton Development Corporation Divestiture Authorization And Dissolution Act February 16th, 2000

Give them a fair deal. That is what the government should do.

Privacy Act February 8th, 2000

You asked the provinces?

Privacy Act February 8th, 2000

Madam Speaker, four months ago I stood in the House asking for a commitment to a national child care program and received a half-baked answer about how the government supposedly tried and was stopped by provincial governments.

The fact is that if the government had the will to do so, it could implement a national child care program right now. Instead, the government has tried to pass the buck of responsibility as it has with many other programs and services.

What happened to the 150,000 spaces for children in child care that was promised in 1993? The government promised $720 million for child care in 1993, but it has in fact cut spending. In too many provinces, like my home province of Nova Scotia, the child tax benefit is clawed back when families' main source of income is social assistance, a perverse attempt at addressing poverty which has ensured that the needs of children in poor families have not been addressed.

If the Prime Minister and the Liberal government really took the needs of children seriously, they would know that the parents of these children have clearly stated that a federally funded national child care program is what both the children of Canada and their parents need to start off on the right path.

Liberal double-talk on child care is just one more example of how the government has been saying one thing and doing another. Over four months ago the government made a speech about how children would be a priority in the 2000 budget. But what has it done over the last six years in power? Broken promise after broken promise has meant simply more poverty and more poor families.

We all agree on the benefits to children of quality care in and outside their homes in their early years. We all agree that children are a priority. We all know that money exists to make a national child care program a reality. We all know that the only reason we do not have such a program is because of the lack of will and commitment to Canada's children shown by the Liberal government in its race to the bottom.

As the mother of two children and as a Canadian I think it is unacceptable that only 9% of children in need of care have access to regulated child care.

Today I would ask the government when it will finally agree that we need a federally funded national child care program and when it will commit to a date when it will provide access to quality, affordable child care for all of Canada's children.